Just noticed that someone included i.e. some Purism Librem devices to a " Recently tested mainboards: " section - but, when I check https://review.coreboot.org/cgit/board-status.git/log/purism , the latest board status for Purism happened even before 4.9 ! And without a recent enough _public_ "board status" report - containing the important info about your build and its' complete configuration - I don't think we could include them to a "recently tested" list, since the other users won't have a chance to reproduce your build by using your configuration. Same question regarding some other of these additions, so removing them from a " Recently tested mainboards: " list, but of course they could be re-added if someone will submit a board_status reports from them.
We would like to encourage the board status reporting, and relying on the word of users ( "I tested X board and it worked" ) would not help us to collect the known good configs at our coreboot/board_status repository. To submit a board status report for your board, please run a ./coreboot/util/board_status/board_status.sh script on it. Removed: * Purism Librem 13 v1 * Purism Librem 15 v2 * Purism Librem 13 v2/v3 * Purism Librem 15 v3 * Purism Librem 13 v4 * Purism Librem 15 v4 * Samsung Chromebook 3 (google/celes) * Acer Chromebook R11 (google/cyan) * Google Chromebook Pixel 2013 (google/link) * Toshiba Chromebook 2 (2014) (google/swanky) * Dell Chromebook 13 7310 (google/lulu) * Dell Inspiron Chromebook 14 (google/nami) * Acer Chromebook 14 (google/edgar) * HP Chromebook 13 G1 (google/chell) * Asus Chromebox CN60 (google/panther) * Asus Chromebox CN62 (google/guado) * Asus Chromebox CN65 (google/fizz) Added: (just saw two new reports by Michał Żygowski here - https://review.coreboot.org/cgit/board-status.git/ ) PC Engines APU1 PC Engines APU2 New version: Recently tested mainboards: --------------------------- * Lenovo Ideapad G505S * Lenovo Thinkpad T400 * Lenovo ThinkPad T420 * Lenovo Thinkpad T430 * Lenovo Thinkpad T430s baseboard * Lenovo Thinkpad T530 baseboard * Lenovo Thinkpad X131e Chromebook (Google Stout) * Lenovo ThinkPad X200 * Lenovo Thinkpad X220 * Lenovo Thinkpad X230 * Gigabyte GA-B75M-D3H * Asrock E350M1 * PC Engines APU1 * PC Engines APU2 On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:55 PM Mike Banon <mikeb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If the upstream edk2 is so bad - have you tried to upstream your set > of patches? It is good that your personal fork/repo is stable, but > inevitably it will always lag behind the upstream, not benefiting from > some new features and bugfixes. Same reason why I didn't want to fork > a coreboot despite having a big set of unofficial patches , instead > trying to upstream them when I have some free time. > > > On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 11:41 PM Matt DeVillier <matt.devill...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > there is no "stable" branch for upstream edk2 though. Previously, coreboot > > used an arbitrary commit as stable, and applied ~7 patches on top if it to > > make it functional. Even the UDK201x branches don't boot without patches > > > > On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 3:30 PM Lance Zhao <lance.z...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Tianocore master branch build from edk2 will break, but that had been > >> quite some time. Stable branch is working fine though. > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 3:28 AM Matt DeVillier <matt.devill...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 1:27 PM Mike Banon <mikeb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Also, regarding the significant changes: " ### Tianocore UEFI > >>>> integrated as payload " . I hope it doesn't mean that Tianocore will > >>>> become the default payload, since there are ideological/technical > >>>> reasons against this ( I think there's a significant overlap between > >>>> the groups of people who love / interested in coreboot and hate UEFI ) > >>> > >>> > >>> the change could be reworded better I think: instead of the stable tag > >>> for Tianocore being pulled from the upstream edk2 github repo and a > >>> series of patches applied, it's now pulled directly from my fork/repo, > >>> which is actually functional on most (x86_64) devices. A few tweaks (like > >>> customizable boot splash) were added as well. > >>> > >>> there is no change to the default payload, only to the defaults for > >>> Tianocore > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org > >>> To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org _______________________________________________ coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org
